Sheriff's officials wrongfully returned a gun to a man who used it to kill his ex-wife inside a busy Southern California mall last weekend, even though a judge had ordered the weapon be confiscated by investigators...[More]Completely understandable. He was trusted without a custodian, wasn't he?
Thursday, March 22, 2018
We're the Only Ones Arming Enough
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
“Crane later contacted the California Department of Justice and received a letter saying he was eligible to possess a gun… Crane was legally allowed to purchase a gun — because he wasn’t convicted of a crime — but the sheriff’s department should not have returned the gun that was confiscated, Buschow said."
So then, a distinction entirely without a difference.
This article is nonsense, obsessing over absolutely artificial bureaucratic BS.
Post a Comment